Geospatial Perspective

Hogrebe, Mark C.; Tate, William F.

doi:10.3102/0091732x11422861

Cited by 27 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To do so, we repeated the two sets of models, including three contextual variables (in place of the original independent variables, due to concerns about multicollinearity). First, as an indicator of districts' economic resources and support, we included per-pupil expenditures (Hogrebe & Tate, 2012). The second additional variable was motivated by Jackson et al's (2018) finding that ways of framing problems can differ with respect to district leaders' roles.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Beyond individuals' access to resources, scholars have also investigated how relationships between resources and learning outcomes vary by location. Hogrebe and Tate (2012) examined variation across Missouri school districts in the ways that Algebra I test scores were related to poverty, teaching (e.g., average teacher salary), and fiscal contexts (e.g., expenditures per average daily attendance). The researchers found that relations with Algebra I scores varied depending on where school districts were located, with stronger and more statistically significant relations around the large urban areas.…”

Section: Attending To Geographymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Framing School Mathematics Challenges Inside and Outside Metropolitan Areas

Munter

Nguyen

Kinder

2023

Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Context: The problems that school district leaders identify and how they frame them have consequences—for both policy implementation and the ways that teachers respond. Although that is likely true in all community contexts (from rural to urban, inside and outside metropolitan centers), the influence of broader discourses associated with accountability reforms centered around state standardized testing may not be uniform across those contexts. Purpose/Objective/Research Question or Focus of Study: In this article, we report the results of an interview study we conducted with leaders in 50 school districts across the U.S. state of Missouri, in which we investigated what they identified as—and how they framed—their districts’ most salient problems related to mathematics. Guiding our analysis were the following questions: (1) What do those who oversee school districts’ mathematics instruction and curriculum identify as mathematics-related problems, and how do they frame those problems? (2) Do leaders’ identification and framing of problems differ with respect to districts’ size and proximity to metropolitan centers? (3) If so, to what extent are institutional factors, including mathematics achievement, economic resources, the presence of a mathematics-specific leader, and the district’s pedagogical commitments, predictive of leaders’ identification and framing of problems? Research Design: In 50 school districts in Missouri, sampled from different categories of size and proximity to metropolitan centers, we interviewed the district leader most responsible for overseeing mathematics curriculum and instruction about their mathematics-related challenges. We also collected contextual information from governmental websites, including population data, student achievement rates, student racial and economic demographics, and district economic resources (i.e., per-pupil expenditures). Through qualitative analysis we identified what leaders identified as their most pressing challenge and how they framed that challenge. Through regression analysis we identified which community and district characteristics were predictive of leaders’ problem identification and framing. Conclusions/Recommendations: Our results point to meaningful differences in leaders’ identification and framing of problems related to whether they work within metropolitan areas. In particular, we argue that leaders in nonmetropolitan districts appear more likely to adopt the frame offered by the “corporate model of schooling,” defining and framing problems around improvement in standardized test scores, whereas leaders in metropolitan areas are more likely to define problems in terms of equity and the ways that students experience school mathematics. And leaders from smaller districts were more likely to employ a strictly “management” framing of outcomes-related problems, describing responses focused exclusively on changing district programs and structures (rather than a “learning” frame that foregrounds supporting and developing staff). Institutional factors predictive of leaders’ identification of problems concerning equity and student experience included per-pupil expenditures, higher rates of test proficiency, commitment to inquiry-based pedagogy, and the presence of a district mathematics leader.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Attending To Geographymentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing School Mathematics Challenges Inside and Outside Metropolitan Areas

Munter

Nguyen

Kinder

2023

Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, there have been increased calls for moving beyond post-post-positivistic geospatial research and toward more mixed and qualitative methods (Elwood & Cope, 2009;Lubienski & Lee, 2017;, as well as the application of critical perspectives in GIS research (Hogrebe & Tate, 2012;Jabbar et al, 2017;Yoon, Gulson, & Lubienski, 2018). Those calls are now being answered, and more qualitative GIS studies have emerged (Bell, 2007;Jabbar et al, 2017;Yoon, Lubienski, & Lee, 2018), including "participatory GIS" (Dunn, 2007;Elwood, 2006;Weiner & Harris, 2008;, those that engage marginalized communities and their members (Ghose & Welcenbach, 2018;Hogrebe & Tate, 2012;Kwan & Ding, 2008), or those that are emancipatory in nature (Sui, 2015). Mixed-method approaches invite both etic and emic perspectives, giving deeper accounts of "place" and pushing GIS research to consider not only multiple ways of knowing but also multiple ontologies.…”

Section: Overview Of Gis Analytic Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geospatial Analysis: A New Window Into Educational Equity, Access, and Opportunity

Cobb¹

2020

Review of Research in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A robust body of geographic education policy research has been amassing over the past 25 years, as researchers from a variety of disciplinary backgrounds have recognized the value of examining education phenomena from a spatial perspective. In this chapter, I synthesize 42 studies that examine education issues using a geographic information system, or GIS. The review is framed by the major thread that runs through this body of research: educational equity, access, and opportunity. I summarize the research within seven theme-based research topics and offer examples of geospatial analysis as applied to education. The chapter includes a discussion of the major barriers and limitation facing GIS researchers and offers thoughts about the future.

show abstract

“…Geospatial analyses allow for connections to be made between social contexts and educational outcomes and bring to light local, regional and national patterns of stratification (Hogrebe & Tate, 2012). Geographic context influences the student population characteristics and academic performance of schools.…”

Section: The Geography Of Charter Schools and Stratificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping the Profit Motive: A Comparative Analysis of For-Profit and Non-Profit Charter Schools

Robertson

2015

EPAA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For-profit charter schools represent a controversial new market-based education reform (Garcia, Barber, & Molnar, 2009; Conn, 2002). This essay explores how schools operated by for-profit corporations differ from those operated by non-profit organizations. Specifically, do for-profit charter schools locate in demographically distinct areas and serve different student populations than similar schools operated by non-profit providers? Research suggests that charter school operators in some districts appear to strategically locate their schools in an effort to exclude certain student populations (Lubienski, Gulosino, & Weitzel, 2009). If charter schools seek to exclude certain students, as these schools proliferate in a district or region there may be an intensifying stratification effect detrimental to the most disadvantaged students (Bifulco, Ladd, & Ross, 2009). This essay undertakes a broad comparative analysis of the neighborhood demographic and student population characteristics of charter schools operated by for-profit corporations and nonprofit organizations, using multilevel modeling and geographic information systems, to compare the two school types across dissimilar state contexts. In so doing, the study seeks to isolate the impact of a school being operated by a for-profit corporation and illuminate what impact the proliferation of for-profit schools might have on the distribution of student populations across regions.

show abstract

Geospatial Perspective

Cited by 27 publications

References 50 publications

Framing School Mathematics Challenges Inside and Outside Metropolitan Areas

Framing School Mathematics Challenges Inside and Outside Metropolitan Areas

Geospatial Analysis: A New Window Into Educational Equity, Access, and Opportunity

Mapping the Profit Motive: A Comparative Analysis of For-Profit and Non-Profit Charter Schools

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Geospatial Perspective

Cited by 27 publications

References 50 publications

Framing School Mathematics Challenges Inside and Outside Metropolitan Areas

Framing School Mathematics Challenges Inside and Outside Metropolitan Areas

Geospatial Analysis: A New Window Into Educational Equity, Access, and Opportunity

Mapping the Profit Motive: A Comparative Analysis of For-­Profit and Non-­Profit Charter Schools

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Mapping the Profit Motive: A Comparative Analysis of For-Profit and Non-Profit Charter Schools